1 Reportable

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6000  OF 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.14967 of 2018)

Medical Council of India      ……Appellant

Versus

Jaipur National University Institute for   Medical Sciences and Research Centre  Jaipur and Another     ..…. Respondents

JUDGMENT

Uday Umesh Lalit, J.

Leave granted.

2. This  appeal  challenges  the  correctness  of  interim  order  dated

29.05.2018 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur in D. B.

Civil  Writ  Petition  No.10103/2018  whereby  the  High  Court  directed  the

Central  Government  to  permit  the  Respondent  Institute  to  admit  150

2 students in the third batch of MBBS course for the academic year 2018-

2019.

3. Pursuant  to  appropriate  recommendation  having  been  given  by

Medical  Council  of  India  (‘MCI’,  for  short),  Central  Government  by  its

letter  dated  06.06.2016  granted  letter  of  permission  to  the  Respondent

Institute to establish a Medical College from the academic year 2016-2017

with annual undertake of 150 students.  It appears that after conducting due

inspection and verification, MCI did not recommend renewal of permission

for  the  next  academic  session  2017-2018.   However,  the  Central

Government by its letter dated 31.05.2017 granted renewal of permission to

admit 2nd Batch of students for the academic year 2017-2018.

4. In Writ Petition No.432 of 2017 (N.C. Medical College and Hospital

Principal v.  Union of India Secretary and Another), a list of 24 Colleges

who  despite  negative  recommendation  on  part  of  MCI  were  accorded

renewal  of  permission by the  Central  Government  was  extracted  by this

Court in its order dated 09.10.2017 and all those Institutions including the

Respondent Institute were added as respondents.  This Court further directed

MCI to conduct surprise inspection in respect of all the Colleges.  It appears

that  the Assessors  appointed  by MCI conducted physical  assessment  and

3 verification on 31st October, 2017 and 1st November, 2017.  The assessment

report was placed before the Executive Committee of MCI in its Meeting

held  on  22.11.2017  where  the  Executive  Committee  observed  various

deficiencies of Infrastructure, Clinical Material and other physical facilities.

The Executive Committee therefore decided to recommend to the Central

Government not to grant renewal of permission for the 3rd Batch of students

for  the  academic  year  2018-2019.   Thereafter,  the  Central  Government

afforded opportunity of hearing to the Respondent Institute and requested

MCI to review the case of Respondent Institute.  Aforesaid Writ Petition

No.432 of 2017 was disposed of by this Court on 17.01.2018 directing MCI

to  take  appropriate  decision  in  respect  of  25  Medical  Colleges  for  the

academic year 2018-2019 by 31.03.2018.

5. In  order  to  verify  the  claims  made  by  the  Respondent  Institute

regarding  compliance  and  that  the  deficiencies  had  been  removed,  MCI

conducted compliance verification on 05.03.2018 and the report in respect

thereof was placed in the Meeting of the Executive Committee of MCI held

on 24.03.2018.  After discussion and deliberation, the Executive Committee

found that the deficiencies in respect of Infrastructure, Clinical Material and

other  physical  facilities  still  persisted  and therefore  recommended  to  the

4 Central Government not to grant renewal of permission to the Respondent

Institute for  academic session 2018-2019.  The Central  Government after

due  consideration  of  the  recommendations  made  by  MCI,  vide  its  letter

dated 01.05.2018 decided not to grant renewal of permission for admission

for the academic year 2018-2019.

6. The aforesaid decision of the Central Government was challenged by

the Respondent Institute by preferring D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10103 of

2018 in the High Court of Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur.  It appears that since

the  Advocates  in  Jaipur  had  gone  on  strike,  the  Chairperson  of  the

Respondent  Institute,  Under  Secretary,  Ministry  of  Health  and  Family

Welfare, Union of India and Law Officer of MCI who were present, were

heard by the High Court on 29.05.2018.  The High Court found that the

inspection conducted by MCI was with predetermined mind not to renew the

permission to the Respondent Institute and was of the prima facie view that

the findings arrived at by MCI were required to be stayed at the interim

stage.  The High Court thus while admitting the petition fixed the matter for

final hearing on 09.07.2018 but proceeded to pass following order:-

“6.2 The matter is fixed for final hearing on 09.07.2018.

6.3 In the meantime and till disposal of the petition, the order dated 01.05.2018  as  well  as  dated  28.03.2018  both  are  stayed  and

5 respondent No.1 is directed to allow the petitioner College to admit 150  students  in  the  third  batch  for  the  academic  year  2018-2019 subject to a rider that if ultimately the petitioner fails in this petition, he will refund all the fees to the students who are admitted pursuant to the order of this court.   

6.4 The stay application is accordingly disposed of.

The Central Government will act upon this order”.   

7. This  appeal  questioning  the  aforesaid  interim  direction  dated

29.05.2018  was  listed  along  with  a  similar  matter  where  by  way  of  an

interim  direction  the  concerned  College  was  allowed  to  go  ahead  with

admissions to 1st MBBS course for the academic session 2018-2019.  After

having heard Mr. Maninder Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General of

India  in  support  of  the  appeal  and  Mr.  Vivek  Krishna  Tankha,  Senior

Advocate for the respondent in the present matter in whose submission there

were  no  deficiencies  at  all,  this  Court  on  14.06.2018  had  reserved  the

matters for judgment and passed following order:-  

“Heard learned counsel.  In both these matters, the High Courts  have  permitted  the  concerned medical  colleges  to  go ahead with admissions.  The correctness of those orders passed at  an  interim stage  is  under  challenge  at  the  instance  of  the Medical College of India.  We have been given to understand by the learned counsel appearing for both the medical colleges that till this date, no admissions have been effected despite the interim orders passed by the High Court in their favour.  The statement is taken on record.

We  reserve  the  judgment  and  till  the  judgment  is pronounced, no admission shall take place in respect of both the

6 institutions to the course of 1st MBBS for the ensuing academic session 2018-2019.

Permission  is  granted  to  place  on  record  requisite documents by 16.06.2018.”

8. In the companion matter namely Civil Appeal arising out of Special

Leave  Petition  (Civil)  No.14972  of  2018,  we  have  adverted  to  certain

decisions of this Court where the propriety and correctness of similar such

interim directions had been questioned before this Court.  Relying upon the

decisions in (i)  Medical  Council of India  v. Rajiv Gandhi University of

Health Sciences and others1, (ii) Medical Council of India v. JSS Medical

College2,  (iii) Medical  Council  of  India  v. Kalinga Institute  of  Medical

Sciences (KIMS)3,  (iv) Dental Council of India  v. Dr. Hedgewar Smruti

Rugna Seva Mandal Hingoli and Others4, we have held in the companion

matter  that  there  was  no  justification  for  passing  interim  directions  and

permitting the concerned College to go ahead with provisional admissions

for  the  academic  session  2018-2019.   We  have  further  held  that  any

stipulation that the admissions pursuant to such interim directions shall be

subject to the result of the petition would not be a sufficient protection or

insulation and such orders result  in tremendous prejudice to the students.

1(2004) 6 SCC 76 2 (2012) 5 SCC 628 3 (2016) 11 SCC 530 4 (2017) 13 SCC 115

7 We have further held that if a case is made out the proper course is to hear

the matter finally rather than passing interim directions as have been passed

in the present matter.  Based on same reasoning, we hold that the High Court

was not justified in passing the order under challenge.

9. We,  therefore,  allow  this  appeal  and  set  aside  the  order  dated

29.05.2018 passed by the High Court.  Since the matter is to come up on

09.07.2018 before the High Court, the entire controversy can be gone into.

We have not dealt  with factual controversy in the present matter and the

facts that have been set out in the preceding paragraphs are only by way of

narration of events.  We are sure that the pending matter will be considered

purely on merits.

10. With these observations, the present appeal is allowed and the order

under appeal is set aside.  No costs.   

…………………..……J. (Uday Umesh Lalit)

..………………………J. (Deepak Gupta)

New Delhi, July 4, 2018